On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think there is some chance that such a change could induce
> regression for the cases when there are many index columns or I think
> even when index is on multiple columns (consider index is on first and
> eight column in a ten column table).
I don't see that as a problem because the routine only checks for columns
that are passed as "interesting_cols".

Noticed below comment in interesting-attrs-2.patch
> + * are considered the "key" of rows in the table, and columns that are
> + * part of indirect indexes.
> Is it right to mention about indirect indexes in above comment
> considering indirect indexes are still not part of core code?

I agree. We can add details about indirect indexes or WARM later, as and
when those patches get committed.

> Pavan, please rebase your WARM patch on top of this and let me know how
> you like it.  I'll post a new version of indirect indexes later this
> week.
I've rebased WARM on top of this patch and the proposed changes look fine
from WARM's perspective too. I'll send rebased patches separately.


 Pavan Deolasee                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Reply via email to